Peer Review Dephasing

[a rose]

Alexander Berezin wrote:

> My practical recommendation therefore, is to
> encourage posting of in-substance critisism of
> of the so-called 'high quality' (peer reviewed,
> in 'good journals') science in those cases when
> people believe that such-and-such paper is lousy
> one (or plagiarized, copycatted, etc) and if they
> can substantiate their criticim.

So every published paper would be the potential beginning of a new 
thread, and we'd basically have the beginning of a public peer review 
open to all. Maybe such a forum would eventually develop into a place 
where people publish not only their critique, but also additional 
findings - not peer reviewed in the traditional sense. But to make this 
work, we'd probably need a good number new newsgroups (maybe even one for 
each journal?), and each with an archive. Is there any chance that this 
could be established?

Andreas
 
-- 
Andreas M. Rose, Dipl. Biol.
Zoologie * Universitaet Regensburg * D-93040 Regensburg * Germany * EU
phone: +49-941-943-3076 * fax: +49-941-943-3052
http://www.biologie.uni-regensburg.de/Zoologie/Boeckh/Rose/index.htm